Quick: Catch thrown errors in tests

[potmo]

If you are writing a test in swift 2.0 and use throws the test should expect throwing functions and fail automatically if the function throws.

func aThrowingFunction() throws -> String {
  return "something"
}

class SomeTest: QuickSpec {
  override func spec() {
    describe("hanlding throwing functions") {
      it("should compile when having function that throws") {
        aThrowingFunction() // <- this should compile. test should fail if function throws
      }
    }
  }
}

[potmo]

Might also be nice to add something like Mockitos expects. It could look something like:

it("should be able to expect errors", expects: .SomeError ) {
  aThrowingFunction() // <-- test should fail if the function does not throw.
}

[jeffh]

I agree that Quick should fail implicitly if a throwing function fails.

I'm personally not a big fan of the Mockito-style of error catching. I've never used that library, but it sounds weird to me a mocking library would support that on some test runner infrastructure.

[potmo]

Yes it sounds strange that Mockito should catch errors. I looked it up and it is actually JUnit that catches and asserts errors.

[basharov]

Is this error related to the issue?

AgentTests.swift:40:17: Cannot invoke 'it' with an argument list of type '(String, () throws -> ())'

I have this which shows that error:

describe("rejectWrongUser") {
    it("rejects a user that is not present in the database") {
        do {
            let user = try ApiConsumer.login("maxpayne", password: "1234567890")
        } catch ApiError.WrongUsernameOrPassword(let message) {
            print (message)
        }
    }
}

[potmo]

you need to catch all possible errors so you probably need a default

do {
 // something that throws
} catch  SomeError.Something() {
// do something
} catch default {
// you need to do this as well
}

If the closure in it would rethrow and catch all other errors your code might work.

[basharov]

Thanks, adding default case helped! Though I suppose default itself is a reserved word.

[noisypigeon]

Is this something that's still of interest or needed?

[yonaskolb]

I would love this too

[jwelton]

+1 👍

[forceunwrap]

+1

[noahsark769]

Just throwing my hat in to say this would be really nice as well. @ikesyo any progress here or anything I can help with? Would be happy to try to contribute a bit